Central Administrative Tribunal - Chandigarh
Sunil Kumar Son Of Shri Ram Swarup ... vs Union Of India on 17 March, 2011
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.161-PB of 2010
Chandigarh, this the 17th day of March, 2011
CORAM:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND, MEMBER(J)
HONBLE MR.KHUSHI RAM, MEMBER(A)
Sunil Kumar son of Shri Ram Swarup working as J.E.Grade-I, Works, Northern Railway, Ferozpur.
APPLICANT
BY ADVOCATE: SHRI JAGDEEP JASWAL in proxy for SHRI D.R.SHARMA, COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT.
VERSUS
1. Union of India, through General Manager (P), Northern Railway Headquarters, Baroda House, new Delhi.
2. Chairman, Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, New Delhi.
3. Chief Personnel officer, Northern Railway Headquarters, Baroda House, new Delhi.
4. Principal Chief Engineer, Northern Railway Headquarters, Baroda House, New Delhi.
5. Divisional Engineer Grade-I, Northern Railway, Ferozpur.
RESPONDENTS
BY ADVOCATE: SHRI G.S.SATHI
ORDER
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND, MEMBER(J):-
It is apparent, from a conjunctive perusal of the pleadings raised by the parties, that the plea raised by the applicant herein for re-evaluation of papers was negatived by the Competent Authority on an averment that there is no rule of re-evaluation of answersheets. A similar plea did indeed come to be allowed in the case of one Raman Kumar. The relevant documentation (granting the re-evaluation plea in favour of Raman Kumar appears at Page 60 of the paperbook as Annexure A-4); while the rejection of a similar plea raised by the applicant came about vide documentation annexed as Annexure R-1 dated 13.11.2009 (at Page 70 of the paperbook). It is obvious therefrom that, the applicant was disabled in properly assailing the validity of the impugned evaluation.
2. The learned counsel for the applicant states that the interest of justice would be served if a direction is issued to the respondents to take a decision on his representation in the light of the view the Competent Authority had taken in a similar plea raised by the applicant Raman Kumar.
3. The O.A. shall stand disposed of, accordingly, with a direction to the Competent Authority to take a decision on the re-evaluation plea raised by the applicant herein in the light of the view obtained by it in the case of Raman Kumar (the details whereof appear in Annexure A-4). The disposal of the representation must come about within three months from today, with intimation to the applicant in writing.
4. The parties shall bear own costs of the cause in the facts and circumstances of the case.
(JUSTICE S.D.ANAND) MEMBER(J) (KHUSHI RAM) MEMBER(A) Dated: March 17 , 2011 `bss 1 (OA No.161-PB/2010)